Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'penalty'.
Found 3 results
Penalize temporarily players who buy products in pirate ports, making them pass having smuggler status as having the products. So they can be attacked for other players without risk turn to pirate.
As a group of enthusiasts we were spit balling this around a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps less important during testing but a simple solution to friendly fire and collision at release. Damaged caused is real. It happened, fog of war, stupidity, heat of the moment bad decision etc. During the game the damage stands. The ship causing the friendly damage has double the points removed from its match score to a minimum of zero points. (Think of this as an on the spot Court Martial inquiry fine and slap on the knuckles). Should point scoring not be taking place, then the fine could be applied as a currency cost either 'as well as' or instead. As the game applies damage and collates points scored I would have thought that blue on blue damage could be recorded relatively easily and then the 'fine' applied for the end of match result. Your thoughts ? Posted on behalf of Sea Lords Virtual Fleet Soundboard group Join Here Captains Crankey Caldwell Master_Scrub Heneage Dundas Robert Danforth Edward Vernon Patrick Walsh Llewellyn Jones RN FLGibsonJr Edward Harvey Jack Aubrey Aplogies if we are repeating anyone elses suggestion here I couldn't locate a direct comparison post.
Afternoon all, played a few more games since my first post and had a few more observations to make. I've seen a few threads discussing ships surrendering, perma-death, ship destructions etc and how this should be implemented. Personally i think that forcing ships to surrender rather than aiming to kill them should be a captains first priority, partly for "realism" but also because it then opens up other game play options such as selling booty etc. With no fear of death in a game, it makes it impossible to psycologically make someone surredener and its much safer to sink a ship from a distance instead of boarding and risking losing. But gameplay benifits of surrendering in a hopeless fight could do the trick. A simple way to do this would be to have a cooldown before you can command another ship... with a longer cooldown if your ship sinks in action than if you surrender. A way of thinking about it in real life terms could be that if you are taking prisoner, you could be exchanged and be employed again BUT if your ship is sunk, chances are you would die or end up in the hospital.... and you wouldn't be exchanged untill you've recovered, increasing the time untill you could get back in the action. In realife, if a merchant ship was vastly outgunned by an opponent and to slow to escape, they would often surrender without a fight and i would encourage this with the incentive that yes you have lost your ship but you can quickly get another and move on, but if you fight it out you will likely still lose but it will take alot longer. I think it could also have interesting implications with regards to insurance. I have not seen this feature discussed anywhere but this is definately a realistic feature which could be brought in if you lose a ship (the more expensive the bigger the cost with warships being more expensive to make it more efficient for merchant ships) Should you fight to the death, the insurance might have to pay compensation for the dead crew, so the captains payout would be less, another benifit for surrendering rather than fighting to the death.